To define quality, in the context of knowledge, is ambiguous as it can be interpreted as emotional connection, depth, or factuality behind the information. In this essay, quality is considered synonymous with accuracy, which is determined solely from scientific evidence. Academic discipline is defined as a particular subject within an area of knowledge. For example, Chemistry is a discipline which lies within the area of knowledge Natural Science. Finally, directly proportional is a term indicative of time – the era at which the knowledge was discovered, and the length of time since the discovery. For example, the quantum mechanical model of the atom was discovered in the twentieth century, and is a relatively recent scientific discovery. This essay will explore the claim in the natural science area of knowledge – specifically in the academic disciplines of Physics and Biology. Within the area of natural science, the claim is not fully applicable due to partial discrepancies.While the real life examples of the Kinetic Molecular Theory and Gravitational Theory have existed for centuries by retaining support from the scientific community, it is inaccurate to allude that all ancient theories contain relevant knowledge. In the area of knowledge Natural Science, scientists are regularly undergoing paradigm shifts to compensate for the ever changing theories about the physical world. Scientific theories require confident explanations about the natural world through the repetition of proper methodologies and documented observations, which creates opportunities for theories to be disproved and replaced. The evolution and development of the Particle Model of the Atom is a real life situation that demonstrates that the quality of knowledge is not directly proportional to time. First proposed by Aristotle, matter was composed of four elements – fire, water, earth, and air. It was later discovered by multiple scientists that matter consisted of atoms with a nucleus and subatomic particles, which led to the modern atomic theory presented by Schrodinger and Heisenberg for the Quantum Cloud Theory. As a whole, the Particle Model of an Atom possesses its knowledge through centuries of modified theories. However, to compare Quantum Theory with Aristotle’s Four Elements contradicts the knowledge claim that ancient knowledge is superior to newly discovered information. The knowledge claim is contradicted because Aristotle’s older theory was replaced and deemed inferior to the quality of knowledge of the Quantum Theory. Through the series of discovery and disapproval, the older knowledge assisted the development of higher quality knowledge, but the contribution is to be considered only as indirectly proportional. Proposed by Ptolemy in 140 AD, his geocentric theory about the Universe indicated that planetary orbits are revolved around the Earth – making Earth the center of the Universe. Until the seventeenth century, the geocentric theory was accepted as the standard model of the Universe. It was not until the proposition of heliocentrism during the Renaissance era – the idea that the Sun is the center of the universe – by revolutionist Nicolaus Copernicus. A revolutionist would seek to disprove ancient knowledge as an act to discover and improve information. It was the invention of the telescope that permitted more accurate and precise observations. Physicist Galileo Galilei was able contribute observations involving the celestial bodies around Jupiter and Venus, which refuted the claims of geocentrism. While heliocentrism was proposed in the sixteenth century, geocentrism remained relevant until the seventeenth century due to the overwhelming support from traditionalists – such as the Roman Catholic Church and its members. When Copernicus published his theory, the acceptance of his theory was delayed because the Church “advised” Copernicus to abandon his theory and threatened to charge him with heresy. The acceptance of a new theory about the Universe would directly conflict with the teachings of Biblical Scripture Psalm 93:1 “Thou hast fixed the earth immovable and firm…” The Scripture indicates the position of the Earth cannot be changed, and since the geocentric theory has been accepted for a vast length of time, to accept heliocentrism would contradict their entire belief system. The position of the Church, in the example aforementioned, and Christoph Grienberger – a Jesuit astronomer – are examples of a traditionalism. A Catholic traditionalist considers religion to be the ultimate authority to provide the divine truth – which is derived from the ancient prophecies of the Bible. Therefore, a traditionalist values the importance of ancient times and knowledge. In the early 1600’s Grienberger repeated results that correlated with Galileo’s observations in support of heliocentrism, but continued to defend Aristotelian geocentrism and degrade heliocentrism because of his religious beliefs. The perspective of a revolutionist would reject the claim that quality knowledge is linked with time, while a traditionalist would support the claim that time is indicative of reliable knowledge. As demonstrated, a traditionalist is conservative of historical information and implements preventative measures to counteract change. Within the area of natural science, the real life example of wives tales illustrate the falsehood of the knowledge claim in the academic discipline of biology. The premises for wives tales is based on their perceived connotation to represent the supposed truth, but in reality is often only a “traditional belief,” or superstition. The idea that gum takes seven years to digest is an example of a wives tale that is false. Despite the presentation of evidence, supporters for the wives tale demonstrate scientific subjectivity and premodernism. Subjectivism is an ideology that evaluates the quality of knowledge based on personal beliefs and pre-modernism is an epistemology with an extreme conservative and bias towards ancient times. The timeline for the disapproval of spontaneous generation – the theory that organisms can be created from inanimate objects – demonstrates scientific subjectivity and a premodernist approach in the discipline of biology. Aristotle introduced the theory of spontaneous generation around 360 BC, while Lazzaro Spallanzani’s experiment with refuting evidence was presented in the mid 1700’s. A scientifically subjective pre-modernist would inherently support the idea of Aristotle’s spontaneous generation because it has been around for over a millennium, as opposed to Needham’s idea that is only a few hundred years old. Many proponents of spontaneous generation, such as John Needham, manipulated the interpretation of his results, therefore illustrating a scientifically subjective premodernist. In many ways, he utilized confirmation bias – to actively emphasize information to support an idea and to marginalize contradicting information – to degrade the accuracy of Spallanzani. Needham seeked for areas of discrepancy in Spallanzani’s experiment, such as the uncontrolled variable of air. Therefore, a scientifically subjective premodernist would support the knowledge claim that time is synonymous with the quality of knowledge produced by using manipulated data. On the contrary, not all wives tales are false. Based on a study conducted by urologist Paul J. Turek at the University of California, the wives tale about hot baths imposing a negative effect on male fertility is proven to be true. The falsification of the wives tale based on the observations from Turek’s study is demonstrative of the ideologies for scientific objectivism. Scientific objectivity emphasizes the importance of the scientific method to endow accurate knowledge in order to prevent accuracy from being influenced by personal bias. An objectivist devalues the importance of time in regards to the production of information if the results are established from the scientific method. The Brazilian Society of Urology is representative of any modern scientist, as the scientific journal was able to support Turek’s idea in 2007 – which is extremely new in comparison to the medieval urban legends that is wives tales. Wives tales demonstrate that inaccurate information can be easily fabricated and shared amongst many generations. This refutes the knowledge claim and illustrates that older knowledge is not synonymous with the production of quality. From the continual discoveries in medical research, it appears as though time is not a reliable criteria to dictate the accuracy of information in the area of knowledge natural science, yet the cliché “the older you get, the wiser you become” remains relevant to many cultures in today’s society. The cliché addresses similar concepts to the knowledge claim by imposing the idea that time is synonymous with the quality of knowledge produced. While time may be an accurate indicator of quality for certain circumstances, in the natural science area of knowledge, time may be able to indirectly contribute to the improvement of quality. To evaluate the validity behind the knowledge produced within an academic discipline solely based on the judgement of time is obscure and subjective to each individual discipline. Hence, to determine the quality of knowledge produced with academic disciplines requires the consideration of factors beyond the measurement of time.